Essays on Strengths and Weakness & Customer Analysis of Lone Star Rib House Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Strengths and Weakness & Customer Analysis of Lone Star Rib House" is a good example of a marketing case study. Product diversity – the range of product offering and the services offered influences the behavior and expectations of the customers (Zimmerman 2011). Lone Star Rib House understands the needs of the customer and seeks to address the needs and requirements of the customers. Lone Star Rib House has a product portfolio that targets numerous customers depending on their tastes (Lone Star Rib House 2015). For example, product diversity such as beef, chicken, prawn, and pork provides an opportunity to the customers to sample the diverse product offering.

Moreover, the presence of sauces and the taste of the products attract more customers. Therefore, balancing the product diversity with the quality of production of the food increases the number of customers and becomes a strength for the business. Brand recognition – Lone Star Rib House is a well-known brand, and the recognition of brand may be attributed to its marketing strategy and the design of the images targeted to the customers (Zimmerman 2011).

In addition, the business model for Lone Star Rib House is franchising meaning that the brand recognition can be recognized at different business outlets, increasing the worthiness of the brand (Crivits et al. 2010). For example, there are around five Lone Star Rib House franchises across Australia meaning that the brand is recognized. Moreover, the strategic location of the business improves the brand recognition component because it is an economic location and the transportation infrastructure is excellent (Drewniany and Jewler 2013). Hence, it is easier to recognize the brand. Effective communication and friendly environment – the communication strategy is employing the Texas pronunciation and behavior during servicing.

The communication approach is memorable and can be linked with the Lone Star Rib House established (Crivits et al. 2010). For example, instead of you, the waiters use y’ meaning the customers can directly associate the communication with a specific location. The quality of service provision also attracts more customers, which is a strength for the establishment. Therefore, the customer care and customer service are strengths that the business continues to capitalize to improve product offerings and experience in the establishment. Party and birthday celebrations - offering free samples and appreciating the development of a child makes more people visit the establishment and forms the basis of communication.

For example, the requirement of Lone Star Rib House to present birthday details to get a free meal is a form of marketing but also engages the children to visit the establishment to sample the free meal (Lone Star Rib House 2015). It is a form of corporate social responsibility in which Lone Star Rib House appreciates the family through the provision of discounted meals.

Hence, Lone Star Rib House is viewed from a positive angle by the customers. Weaknesses Product variety – the customers come in different forms, and some of the customers may come with visitors. The current structure does not incorporate the aspect of vegetarians and also attacks persons by stating that the individuals are not eating meat products miss something important (Lone Star Rib House 2015). Lone Star Rib House should consider the needs and desires of vegetarians in developing the menu.

For example, creating a simple drink that is favorable to vegetarians would increase the number of customers (Silkes, Cai and Lehto, 2013). Moreover, a customer may not like meat, but their respective partners do not like meaning the forms of communication on vegetarian customers would injure the business. Therefore, the review should be done on the menu offerings and the communication process when it comes to marketing. Price and costs of the products – the prices are high for consumers will less disposable income or customers who are supporting many guests during the mealtime (Myung and Mattila 2010).

For example, the beef is around $34 per plate, and if an individual had five friends, the cost would not be manageable. Therefore, Lone Star Rib House should restructure the menu by offering discounts based on the number of customers (Crivits et al. 2010). Moreover, Lone Star Rib House is supposed to create other products, which are avoidable to the discount looking, customers. The purpose of any establishment is to attract optimum customers and through offering value meals, more customers can visit the establishment easily.


Alonso, A.D., and O'Neill, M.A., 2010. Exploring consumers’ images of open restaurant kitchen design. Journal of Retail & Leisure Property, 9(3), pp.247-259.

Barrows, C., and Vieira, E.T., 2012. Recommendations for the development of a new operational classification system for the foodservice industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, p.1096348012436375.

Crivits, M., Paredis, E., Boulanger, P.M., Mutombo, E.J., Bauler, T. and Lefin, A.L., 2010. Scenarios based on sustainability discourses: Constructing alternative consumption and consumer perspectives. Futures, 42(10), pp.1187-1199.

Drewniany, B. and Jewler, A., 2013. Creative strategy in advertising. Cengage Learning.

Lone Star Rib House. (2015). Homepage. Retrieved from

Myung, E. and Mattila, A.S., 2010. Influence of price on consumer meal choice in a bundling context. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 13(2), pp.114-126.

Silkes, C.A., Cai, L.A. and Lehto, X.Y., 2013. Marketing to the culinary tourist. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(4), pp.335-349.

Smith, S., Costello, C., and Muenchen, R.A., 2010. Influence of push and pull motivations on satisfaction and behavioral intentions within a culinary tourism event. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 11(1), pp.17-35.

Zimmerman, F.J., 2011. Using marketing muscle to sell fat: the rise of obesity in the modern economy. Annual Review of Public Health, 32, pp.285-306.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us